Mormon leader presents family history to Obama (did they get the birth certificate?)

The Salt Lake Tribune ^ | 07/20/2009 | Matt Canham

[Tennessee Nana]

The Mormon genealogists would know this! They screwed up big time and have now revealed themselves to be non-authoritative and non-trustworthy in matters of genealogy.
_______________________________________________

Well, just another example, anyway...

This means Obama cant join the DAR, or the SAR, the UEL yes there were black Loyalists) the Huguenots (I was watching out for French names as I read) the Holland Society or the Dutch Settlers Society (No Dutch names either) and what about the Civil War, either side ???

Someone in all those American ancestors must have done something way back but Obama misses out...

Genealogy can be fun but first ya gotta prove you are a real person with sources/proofs, before ya start on the family connections

BTW I’m working on putting that there UE after my name...

:)

[Tennessee Nana]

He forbade intermarriage with them under threat of extension of the curse.
__________________________________

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Did monson do his “profit” job right and explain that one to Obama ???

Surely out of mormon charity, he felt obiiged to ???

Warning Warning, Will Robinson Obama...

[conservativegramma]

......but authoritative in the art of pandering.....

No argument from me on that one. :)

[Vigilanteman]

I fail to see why you are soliciting a quarrel here.

If it is over the definition of primary source documents, you've posted a link and stated the fact that what are considered secondary documents now can be considered primary source documents pre-1910. That's certainly a reasonable argument, but my statement in discussing the two was confined to the modern definition.

If the quarrel you are soliciting is over dating, I will also concede that what are now considered primary source documents such as birth certificates were not available in all states until about 1910. But they were available in some states and territories by the late 19th century. I know this because my grandfather's territorial birth certificate is of that vintage.

Finally, if you are soliciting a quarrel because you feel the Mormon Church's genealogical database is 100% tainted because they are continuing a long tradition of presenting U.S. Presidents with their genealogies and Obama has yet to present a primary source document, then you must necessarily argue:

1. The research presented on Reitwiesner's website is also tainted because it includes a section on Obama. As I pointed out in an earlier post, the information presented in any of this genealogical research is only as accurate as the data sources supporting it.

2. We really don't know who Obama's mother is and, therefore, do not know his matriarchal lineage either. While such a statement could be defensible from the DAR standard which you have cited, it is not logical given the "chain of custody" standard in young Obama's life. I guess it is possible that his teenage mother kidnapped him from an African village somewhere, but the odds are against it.

[conservativegramma]

#1 - It is not I who started this 'quarrel' as you put it since it was you who sought to 'rebuke' MY facts which are still facts. You must have a primary source document to begin any research into a family history. That is genealogy 101. And P.S. my definition of what constitutes a primary source and link IS the modern definition.

#2 - My 'quarrel' has nothing to do with dating. It has everything to do with presenting a family history without ever having obtained a first generation primary source to prove the foundations for that family history.

Look at it this way, if I went into a passport office to receive an official passport and refused to support my contention that I am an American citizen by providing them with all necessary primary source documentation, tell them to just trust my word on the subject, I would be laughed out of the office. Ditto with the D.A.R. Why should the Mormons now get a pass simply because the supposed family history is 'the one'?

#3 - So yes, my issue is the Mormon Church. And yes my argument is your link is tainted because without that primary source document, i.e, birth certificate, no one knows squat about Obama's history - family or otherwise. And furthermore the Reitweisner website agrees with me. The very first sentence includes the following..."should not be considered either exhaustive or authoritative, but rather as a first draft", or did you miss that part???? Without Obama's primary source document birth certificate it cannot and never will be anything resembling authoritative. THAT was my point. And your #2 'chain of custody' argument means absolutely nothing in proving parentage. It merely proves who raised him.

All we know is Stanley's family history, whether or not she is in fact his MOTHER is subject to controversy. Ditto with daddy dearest.

#4 - What the LDS should have done is refuse to honor their long tradition of presenting U.S. Presidents with their genealogies until Obama released his birth certificate and were able to VERIFY it. They missed a golden opportunity. No other U.S. President thus honored has an unproven background and history swathed in mystery. Their decision to go ahead with this mystery genealogy violated every #1 genealogical rule in the book which is include the source! If there is no source, there is no history. Refusing to do this tradition in Obama's case would have been precedent setting, it would have brought this issue completely into the mainstream, and they would have upheld their reputation as top notch genealogists. Now they are nothing more than rank amateurs aiding and abetting a fraudulent President along with the fawning media. That was my 'quarrel'.

And frankly if you don't like it - tough rocks. From now on I intend to inform other genealogists that the LDS is now not completely trustworthy and that every resource at their disposal (INCLUDING ALL THE FAMILY HISTORY LIBRARIES) is to be double checked for accuracy.

[madison10]

Oh, poopy!

[madison10]

Mine were mostly from Wales.

[Tennessee Nana]

Dont have any from Wales that I know of...

Holland, then France, Germany, one lone Irishman until the 1800s...

:)

[Tennessee Nana]

THose chances are good that you find you are related to everyone in town...

:)

[madison10]

I have German, too. Our branch arrived here near the time, or just after the Civil War. Irish, too, don’t know the year, but it’s a fairly common name. (no “O” in front of it).

Supposedly the Welsh name was once French, but that was during the Middle Ages.

[Tennessee Nana]

French as in William the Conqueror, 1066 ???

From Normandy, Normans...

[truth_seeker]

“Don’t conspiracy
types contend the CIA
is mostly Mormons?”

I think you mean FBI?

[Tennessee Nana]

Our German are Palatines who Queen Anne sent here, 1710...

German Flats, NY...

[madison10]

Supposedly fought with William the Conqueror? Is that French? Also, related to Charlemagne, but if one goes back that far there isn’t a whole lot of proof and LOTS of conjecture. ;) Would have had a “de” in front of the name.

[theFIRMbss]

>“Don’t conspiracy types contend the CIA is mostly Mormons?”
>>I think you mean FBI?


Not in the absurd
conspiracy-drunk fringe world
like, for instance, here:

-----------------------------------------------

Recent reports from central Asia and Latin America suggest the CIA is back in its old business of mixing espionage with religion and giving credence to what some observers claim `CIA` actually stands for: `Christians In Action.` ... More recently, the CIA has been actively recruiting Mormon missionaries due to their foreign language skills and supposedly “clean” backgrounds.

CIA involvement with religious groups not a new charge, by Wayne Madsen

[Elsie]

Say...

Obama HAS been looking for a church to attend, since saying goodbye to Rev. Wright.

Perhaps he’ll start visiting a stake near DC!

[truth_seeker]

Thanks for that info, which I don’t dispute.

I also recall reading years ago that the FBI liked Mormons.

Educated, clean cut family types, that sort of thing.

http://www.famousmormons.net/protect.html